02/10/2016 Sunday Politics Wales

This programme contains some flashing images.

We're live from sunny Birmingham on day one of

the Conservative Party Conference, where, three months after Britain

voted to leave the European Union, the Prime Minister has given

us her first inkling of how she plans to do it.

Morning, folks - welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Theresa May says she will trigger Article 50, starting the two year

process of negotiations that will culminate in Britain

leaving the EU, before the end of March next year.

So Brexit by Easter 2019 - but what kind of relationship

A Great Repeal Bill will also be voted on next Spring,

but won't be enacted until we leave, at which point EU laws will be

In the capital, if London was defined by the conservatism of the

Notting Hill set, what now? We explore the potential rise of Sidcup

Man. So far no Great Repeal Act to get

rid of the Sunday Politics Panel - Steve Richards, Rachel Sylvester

and Tom Newton Dunn. It's 100 days since we voted

to leave the EU and the clamour has grown for the Government to tell us

what Brexit would look like. This morning, as the Tory faithful

gather in Birmingham, we still don't expect to be told

what Brexit means but we do know more about the timetable

and the extrication process. A Bill will go before parliament

this spring to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act,

which legalised our membership But it won't actually come

into force until we leave. Theresa May also told

the Andrew Marr Show that Article 50 would be invoked

by March of next year - starting the two year process

of renegotiation before we leave. I have been saying we would not

trigger it before the end of this year, so that we get confirmation in

place. I will be saying in my speech today that we will trigger before

the end of March next year. The remaining members of the EU have to

decide what the process of negotiation is. I hope, and I will

be saying to them, that now they know what the time is going to be,

it is not an exact date, but they know it will be the first quarter of

next year, that we will be able to have some preparatory work so that

once the trigger comes we have a smoother process of negotiation.

Theresa May, on this channel, just over an hour ago. What do you make

of it? Saggy as you said, we know more about when but we don't know

what Brexit is going to be. We don't know how the relationship will work

out, we don't know what the Prime Minister's negotiation position will

be, we haven't worked out anything about the free market access and

freedom of movement. All of the substance. It is a significant

announcement but we don't actually know anything really big about what

our lives are going to be like in future. Is there a risk from the

Prime Minister? Is there a risk putting this before Parliament to

repeal the 1972 Communities Act? Undoubtedly. Anything you put before

the House of Commons or the House of Lords, where there is no Tory

majority, let alone a Brexit majority, risks getting amended. She

runs the risk. There is also a risk of not saying this, not having the

greater appeal, which is actually a great repeal act, when is being

repealed, but she needed to throw the Tory right red meat, and they

got it this morning. There is always the potential of a constitutional

crisis. If the Lords were to dig in over this, or even digging over

Article 50, demand a vote on that, lawyers are arguing whether you need

it or not, it may not be plain sailing when you have a majority of

12? It definitely isn't going to be with a majority of 12. The scope for

constitutional crisis is many. Clashes with the Lords, clashes with

the Commons, Scotland is still there in the background allows a

significant factor. It will always be there, but perhaps in a different

context. I don't think this will be the trigger for a constitutional

crisis. You have to admire the elegant choreography. I was told

ages ago that she knew she could not keep carry on saying Brexit means

Brexit, there will have to be new lines. This is beautiful. We kind of

knew that Article 50 was going to be triggered early in next year. David

Davis even said that. It was a fair bet it would be before Easter. They

couldn't spend the next two years negotiating Brexit and refocusing

the entire legislative programme to spend the next two years rejigging

the mountain of legislation we are affected with. They have turned a

logistical, unavoidable inevitability into a sense of

momentum this weekend. Very clever presentation. There are going to be

huge crises to come over this. Picking off the 1972 Act, putting it

all into British law and legislation, rather than dependent

on Europe, that is what the Brexiteers wanted. To that extent,

she has thrown them a bit of red meat today? Yes, but we still don't

know what Brexit is going to be. But a bit of red meat keeps you going

for a while. Maybe get them through to lunch time. Today or tomorrow?

Really just today. The tactic is to get some stuff about Brexit out, get

them talking about that and then move onto agenda she wants,

domestic. What do you think? Good luck with that! Are you reading my

script coming up? It was on the autocue, I'm sorry! Clearly, she is

accessed about not making his premiership all about Brexit. It

will be, but she is desperate. She needs to define herself away from

Brexit, who is Theresa May, what did she really believe? We have heard

whispers, but the next few days as a chance to do that. The fringe, Liam

Fox is talking at two fringes. Two opportunities for a story. David

Davis as well. These two men of great talent and potentially great

ego, they will not be able to stop themselves having feelings heard.

And Boris. Boris who? I have not seen him on the fringes. Fringe

meetings have been quite dull at party conferences recently. Because

of this issue, I think people are going to pack them out. That is

where words might be said, explosive words. We live for fringe meetings!

The PM hopes her announcement will deal with Brexit on day one

so the conference can get on to talk about other matters.

But as you can see from this not so slim tome - the conference guide-

there are plenty of other issues to talk, maybe even argue about.

Our Ellie caught up with two Tory MPs from different sides

of the party before they set off, to see what they think lies in store

# Just can't wait to get on the road again

# The life I love is making music with my friends

# And I can't wait to get on the road again...#

Do you actually enjoy going to conference?

It's not as much fun as when you're not an MP,

because now people want to talk to you and everybody

But do you make contacts, do you network?

Do think Theresa May gets nervous about conference,

I think if you are performing on a big stage, whoever you are,

you ought to have a few nerves jangling around.

But she's a polished performer, I'm sure she'll know

Theresa May will also know she has several contentious issues she needs

It is perhaps not surprising, then, that day one of

We're pretty well balanced between those of us like myself,

representing constituencies with really high levels

of research, science and agriculture, who will be very

keen, but probably pragmatically understanding that we are not

going to hear everything tomorrow, and the rest

of the party who are just desperate for information.

If they don't think the deal is going in the right way,

they will want to say something about it.

I think the time frame is pretty clear.

We are going to trigger Article 50 at some point relatively

That means we will get the negotiations done a good year

The rest is going to be important meat on the bones.

But, in terms of the core strategy, Theresa May goes into this

So, a unified front, albeit perhaps fragile.

But then there is the question of grammar schools.

Depends whether we hear more about it.

You know, the concept in its one-dimensional sense,

you can't have a problem with that, can you?

Giving parents choice, giving bright children the chance

But, for me, for many of us, it has to be a package

Our teachers are pretty stressed and overworked

I'm not actually sure this is the right time.

I would rather see emphasis being put on fairer funding.

Constituencies like mine have been underfunded for decades.

If you go into politics and government scared

of your own shadow, unprepared to do anything bold or brave,

I think there is no risk-free option.

Of course, people have different views on grammar schools

and it is a totemic political issue as well.

But I think if you read the green paper, the Prime Minister has set

out a very sensible, carefully calibrated approach,

not just to grammar schools but the wider

The new PM also faces big strategic decisions on expensive projects

like airport expansion, an area even her Cabinet

With all these big infrastructure projects, HS2, Heathrow,

issues around fracking, nuclear as well, I think we have got

to take the right decisions for the country, make sure Britain

Each one of those is thorny in its own right.

But what I think is most important is we look at it very carefully,

That is where we all start to see the metal in Theresa,

Whilst on the one hand, having a Prime Minister -

nobody could have been more delighted than me that we managed

to cut the tax credits changes - but having a Prime Minister

that sticks to her guns, I'm not for U-turning,

How confident are you, going to this conference,

that it is all going to be sorted and you are going to be

Well, people predicted an economic nosedive after the referendum.

People said there would be political chaos.

Actually, the economy has proved resilient.

I think there is a sense of resolve on all sides of the party

on all of these different issues to get behind this Prime Minister

Last year, you got into a bit of trouble, being quite vocal

Some suggestion you weren't a proper conservative.

I think I am absolutely a proper conservative.

I think my party needed reminding what conservative was.

Our job is to help people who need a leg up.

Her opening speech in Downing Street told me she absolutely is.

Like all of these things, we will hear more about this week.

# And I can't wait to get on the road again. #

And we're joined now by the Transport Secretary,

who was a leading Leave campaigner, Chris Grayling.

Welcome back to the programme. The great repeal act, what exactly does

it repeal? It repeal the 1972 European Communities Act. It means

the European Court of Justice no longer has sway in the United

Kingdom. It means the European Commission and Parliament no longer

make laws for us. As of today, in our system, European law is supreme

over UK law, and it repeal that. Except what it does is it

consolidates all existing European legislation into British law. It

would be more accurate to call it the great Consolidation act? Is This

is what I argued for during the League campaign. The remaining

campaign said you could not do it, it will take years, it will be a

disaster. My response then is what it is now, the best way to do it is

to consolidate existing legislation, much of which we will want to keep,

the environmental measures, the workers' rights measures, what we

want to do is to make sure we can get certainty before the event and

after the event, for workers, businesses, but what the legal

position will be. Over time, we have the freedom, outside the European

Union, free from the control of the European Court, to change our legal

system in the way that we want. It does mean we would leave the EU with

all of this EU law still part of British law. Now, what would you

wish to change in the aftermath? There is a whole variety of

different things we will be looking at a change. For example, if you

want a practical one, it is unlikely that after we have left the European

Union we will still be paying child benefits to children that have never

even entered the United Kingdom. That is the kind of thing we will be

free to change after we have left. What else? Much of it we will want

to keep, environmental measures, not all that has been done in the

European Union for 40 years has been bad for Britain. How long will it

take to pick all of this after we leave? Will be down to the

Government to decide... Ten years? 20 years? It will take it as long as

we choose. What is right and proper is that on the day after there is a

degree of certainty for businesses. It would not be fair for a company

to be operating under a set of rules, for there to be a cliff edge

where they do not know what is going to happen the day after. Let's make

it an evolution, not a revolution. A lot of the things you have to agree

to enter negotiations mean it will have to remain law even after we

leave? This clearly the case that if a business in this country is

continuing to sell a product in the European Union, it will have to make

the standards of the European Union. Those rules will apply. That is the

same if we're selling to the United States, the rules of the United

States would apply to a business planning to sell a product there.

What happens if you lose the vote? It is inconceivable that Parliament

can look at the view of the British public and ignore it. Parliament

voted overwhelmingly for the referendum to take place in the

first place, the people have given a mandate and I am certain Parliament

will fulfil it. What would happen? You have a

majority of only 12 and there was a majority for remain in the Commons

and there is a large majority in the house of lords. If the parliament

does not seamlessly agree for what you call the great repeal act, what

would happen? Both houses are full of Democrats and they will respect

the will of the people. But we could be faced with a constitutional

crisis? We have taken the decision to leave and parliament voted for

the referendum and it is inconceivable that Parliament would

not allow that process to go forward. If the inconceivable

happen, you'd have to cores and -- call an election. Inconceivable is a

bit of a stretch. Plenty of voices, particularly in the House of Lords,

would use this as a an opportunity to thwart you. And I don't think the

House of Lords will turn around and say we should not fulfil that. There

may be dissenting voices but they will view it as a democratic mandate

that we have to fulfil. Has your party don soundings in the Commons

to make sure you can get this through? I've not been involved in

that discussion but parliament will respond to the will of the people.

That's the way this country works. That's what you hope. We shall see

how it works. We've been told by the Prime Minister this morning that

article 50 will be triggered by the end of March. That means that we are

out by Easter 2019. Can you confirm that those British members of the

European Parliament currently in Strasberg, there will be no more for

them after this. If we have left by the end of the two-year period. It

is technically possible to extend it. After that period, there

wouldn't be EP is after that point in 2019. -- MEPs. For Brexit to mean

Brexit, the famous phrase, which is basically tautology. It would mean

the freedom to have our own trade laws. It would mean the ability to

do that? You are leading me to answer questions about the specific

legal structures. It means our own free-trade deals? Correct. It would

mean we are no longer subject to the rules of the European Court of

Justice. Also correct. And we would have whatever control we desire over

immigration? The Prime Minister has been clear that we need to control

the flow of immigration into the country. Any of these counts as out

from being a member of the single market. So can we agree that there

is no way we can remain a member of the single market? There is no such

thing as a member of the single market. There are a number of

different trading agreements within the EU. We are effectively a member

of the single market now but we can't be after this. The question

you have asked me, do we want to be Norway, Switzerland, Canada when it

comes to trading arrangements? We want to be the United Kingdom. We

are the biggest customer of German car-makers, French farmers... I

don't want to have the referendum fight again. It seems as black as

black or as White is white that if you want all of that we cannot be a

member, we can have access on terms yet to be agreed, we will have a

relationship, but why cannot you say that we won't be a member in the way

that we are currently a member of the single market? We won't be a

member of the European Union but there is no such thing as a member

of the single market. There is no single market in services, for

example. There is but it is not as developed as goods. I believe we

will end up with a trading partnership with the European Union

on terms to be agreed that will work for both of us. Access but not

membership. You cannot be a fully paid-up member of the single market

without the European Court of Justice ruling on it and you don't

want that. I don't understand your problem. Your pre-merging --

prejudging the outcome of negotiations. We want the best

possible trading arrangements with European neighbours and that is what

we will work towards. Where different to the other countries

that have been involved in these negotiations before. We have heard

all that before in the referendum and we wanted some clarity on what

it would mean. Transport, when will you give is the decision on runway

expansion? I'm not going to set a date today. I've spent the summer

looking at the three different options. We have three very well

presented packages. The airport commission has looked at it

carefully and the Prime Minister and I want to understand the options in

detail and understand the strengths and weaknesses of each and we will

reach our decision shortly. I'm not going to set a date on it. Shortly

means in this year, surely. I don't want to wait unnecessarily long to

take the decision but nor do I want to set a date so to to work towards

that. Will there be a free vote? I need to identify the best option for

Britain and take the best possible approach to get the support of

parliament Porritt. Will there be a free vote? Decisions have not been

taken but we will do the best for the interests of the country.

Theresa May has said the options for an expansion to Heathrow are

seriously flawed. Philip Hammond has described the Heathrow option as

dead as a Norwegian parrot. Can you be sure that the Prime Minister and

Anna Chancellor will vote for your proposal? We are looking at three

options that are very new. One of them is Heathrow. Warrant -- they

are very different options to what has been proposed in the past. They

are all very well crafted proposals. They are interesting and have

potential and we need to decide. That is why I am asking you. HS2,

high-speed train, can you state categorically it will go ahead? It's

due to start construction in the spring. The hybrids Bill Haas to

continue its passage through the house of law -- the hybrid Bill Haas

to continue through its passage in the house of lords. Will it be 2026?

Will it be on-time and on budget? The select committee of MPs said it

is unlikely and will certainly be over budget. I expected be

absolutely clear and on -- expected to be absolutely on-time and on

budget. The latest estimate for phase one, the core cast is ?14

billion but there is contingency on top of that. How much? It is set to

Treasury rules. It is always going to be over. If you really believed

in the Northern powerhouse wouldn't this money be better spent instead

of making it quicker to come to and Birmingham from London in under 90

minutes, which you already can, wouldn't it be better to spend the

money on state of the art road links between East and West in the north.

I think we need to do both. We can't get more freight onto rail without

creating more space. By taking fast trains off the West Coast main line

which is already busy and put fast freight trains onto the new route,

you create more capacity for places like Milton Keynes Dons Northampton,

Coventry. It is about making sure we have a transport system that can

cope with the demands of the 21st-century. Thank you very much.

Now, as we speak, voters in Hungary are going to the polls to vote

on whether to accept mandatory EU quotas for relocating migrants.

The country's government has been campaigning for voters to reject

the EU's proposals and has run a highly controversial campaign,

accusing migrants of terrorism and crime - and the Prime Minister

Viktor Orban has said today he'll quit if the country votes

In response to the ongoing migrant crisis, the EU wants to establish

a permanent European resettlement programme, under which,

member states must take their fair share of asylum seekers,

depending on the size of each country's population and economy.

If countries refuse, the European Commission has proposed

that they would incur a financial penalty of 250,000 euros per person,

to cover the cost of another country taking them.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said the plan

Last year, Hungary rejected an emergency EU plan that would have

seen tens of thousands of refugees transferred out of the country

in return for accepting a quota of almost 1300 refugees

As an EU border country, Hungary has received 18,500

In 2015, it received the most asylum applications relative

to its population of any EU state - 1800 for every 100,000 local people,

though the majority of those then travelled onwards to other

Although the referendum result will have no affect

on the EU's decision, the Hungarian government hopes

the weight of public opinion will help it resist the plans,

running a very controversial referendum campaign.

For example, this poster saying migrants carried out

We're joined now from Budapest by our Correspondent, Nick Thorpe.

I understand that the polls are pretty clear that the government

will win this referendum but it needs a turnout of at least 50% for

it to matter. What indication of turnout so far? As of 11am, turnout

was just over 16% of the electorate. We have an electrode of 8.3 million,

the government is campaigning strongly for a no vote. The

government have framed the question in such a way that it is hard to

vote, yes, we do want this imposed on us. The issue of turnout is

important because the opposition have campaigned not to vote or to

spoil votes. Even if the government wins on the numbers, if more people

vote against the quotas, is it a symbolic defeat for the government

if that was to happen? Some people will argue it would be a symbolic

defeat if they don't get 50%. We've heard that ministers are backing off

the whole issue of turnout. They are hoping for at least 3 million people

to vote. Even 4 million which would be the 50%, voting no to migrant

quotas. They say that all of those votes will give them a strong moral

hand. In the words of the Prime Minister, it will sharpen the

Hungarian sword in the battles ahead. Thank you very much.

Malin Bjork is Swedish MEP and Vice Chair of

the Confederal Group of the European United Left

Welcome to the programme. The quota system proposed already seem to be

dying if the Hungarians vote the way they are expected to today, that

will kill it, will it not? I think we should have it as a point of

departure whether we have seen that Hungary is a model in any of the

fields that we want hungry -- Europe to be. I don't think Hungary is the

model. I don't think we should give him the kind of weight that he

actually claims. He wants more weight to this referendum. I don't

think we should give it to him. It is not just Hungary, is it? There

are meant to be 100,000 migrants covered by the quota system, fewer

than 5% have been covered by it. It is just not happening, whether

Hungary votes for or against? No, it is totally... But that means it is

not operational, it is simply not working. There are serious

criticisms to have towards implementing partners in this. But I

do think when it comes to the political course, Hungary is playing

a very dangerous, racist and right nationalist game. I don't think we

should adapt to it. If it comes to it, we have to be prepared to be

behind those that do not want to be the Europe that is taking

responsibility globally. Let me clarify what you mean by that. The

Foreign Minister of Luxembourg has already said that Hungary should be

expelled from the European Union. Is that what you are saying as well?

No, no. You know what I think? As a progressive politician on the left

side, I do have a lot of criticisms to the European Union. But there are

planets apart from the kind of models that Viktor Orban is trying

to build, where he does not respect human rights, laws and media

freedoms, and now he attacks refugee rights. Given all of that, let's

accept what you say is true about that, others may dispute it, but

let's accept that as true, why should Hungary remain a member of

the European Union? Well, it is up to each country that has voted to

stay, and voted to become members, voting to stay, I don't think Orban

has any intention of leaving EU. I think he wants more influence in the

EU. I think he wants more influence domestic league through the

referendum and more influence in the EU. The question the rest of the

countries have to ask themselves is if we are going to give it to him or

adapt to his politics in any of these fields he is active in? I

think we should make a stand against it. We should have political forces

in other countries that have exactly the same kind of agendas, which we

don't want to see strengthened. Isn't the problem that may be

Hungary is on the trend, and you are not? We have seem the right, some

may call it the far right even, on the march in Austria, Poland and in

Hungary, even in Germany, with the recent elections in Berlin and

Angela Merkel's backyard, even progressive social Democratic

Sweden, your third biggest party is now the Sweden, Democrats, a hard

right nativist party. Why are forces on the move, and while the forces

used and four on the defensive? The more progressive forces, I think

they are growing in many countries also, such as Spain, Ireland and

other countries. It is not just for the left, it is for the broader

political spectrum to counteract nationalist, right-wing and racist

forces. We know where they lead, a dead end. It is a challenge in the

European countries. Why is Europe going in this direction? In 2016,

why are the forces of the rights so strong? To be honest, I think we

have to be a little bit more humble and say are we failing people in

some way? Yes, austerity policies are not working. Inequalities have

grown for over 20 years in Europe. Of course it is a failure. We are

capable of saving banks, but not refugees. People see this. It is

political failure and I think we have to sit down and create

different pacifists. What is happening now is worrying. I see

some of the political forces in Europe. -- create different

patterns. I see parties in Europe adapting to racism nationalist

voices. I think we have to be the different parties that will not

adapt to nationalist stories. They paint imaginary enemies. A huge

chunk of Hungary's public spending comes from the European Union, net

contributors like Sweden and the United Kingdom. If Hungary votes

this way, should that continue? Should we continue to bankroll it?

The way Europe and the European Union, individual members develop,

of course we should lead discussions about money and heel spending to the

respect for rule of law, the respect for human rights and the respect for

international rights that are being infringed by the Hungarian

government. Of course, we have to have such a discussion and it has to

be frank. It's just gone 11.35,

you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers

in Scotland who leave us now The American ambassador, has told us

how to get more to risk, to come here. I would not get them to try to

pronounce some of the names. Nobody likes a sure. But what next for the

Conservatives? This morning we have had more about what they have

planned, but they have not got the breakthrough that they hope for, the

relentless march upwards at the assembly elections went backwards.

Thank you for joining me. We have an article today, about the future of

the Tories in Wales. Theresa May has said that by March next year she is

going to trigger article 50, is that wise to trigger so soon? Not at all.

She has mapped out the strategy, and she said that she would always

trigger it this year, the early part of next year, confederated the

Cabinet, and herself, cheering the Cabinet committee that is going to

be dealing with this matter. We have got the death approach for the

negotiations. But concealed, triggering in the middle of March,

German and French elections? It is two years of negotiations, it does

not have to be two years if it is concluded sooner, but interestingly,

the Prime Minister has talked about giving this indication of when

article 50 is going to be triggered, interesting dynamic and she has

given certainty to that triggering of article 50, and the rest of the

negotiations, are going to fall into place. That is going to put the

legislative framework into place. I have destroyed this, as a leading

Brexiteer, -- described. Free access to the single market, no curbs on

immigration? Is that possible? Anything is possible. What is clear,

the European Commission and European Union have got to outline what they

are looking for. This is a two-way relationship. And trade with

Britain, just as important as trade with Europe. We have got this

referendum at Hungary, communities feeling as though the voice is not

being listened to. The old structures that that propped up. But

can you see how it would be difficult to allow the United

Kingdom to have tarrif free access to the single market, and curbs on

immigration? As I have just said, I think what the European Union needs

to do is actually look at the old structures, that propped up the

European Union and realise that is not going to last. They have got to

get a blueprint for the future. We have had the referendum, June 23,

and the British people instructed the government to renegotiate the

relationship, and some concerns about negotiating on that. That is

what we are going to be walking off. What about immigration, being such a

large reason for voting Brexit, curbing would be worth it for

trading goods? I think that is a lazy view. We have got a whole range

of issues, on both sides. You cannot isolate one issue. We are defining a

relationship, that for the last 40 years, has governed this country, it

has been governed by the European Union. What people voted for, taking

back control. Where those decisions are taken... People are going to

vote. Your not giving details. Do you think it would worth it?

Having to pay tariffs on certain goods, to curb immigrations? The

negotiations have to be a two-way process. It is not about an

individual view. It is about getting the best overall deal for the United

Kingdom, and Europe. You have got an article in the Sunday Times. Talking

about forming a government at Wales, but you are for the robbery from

government than at any point since devolution. If you look at what we

achieved that constituencies, we slashed majorities... Third in all

regions. But we knew that was going to be the case. We had the rise of

Ukip, you have got to accept that. But they are out of ideas. I have

also said in the article, fed up of Wales being led, I want us to lead,

looking at us positively rather than pointing out the negatives. We can

achieve so much more, the government has got a new mandate. The leader of

the government in Wales, far more popular than you, the Leader of the

Opposition, more popular, you said the Conservatives at a six year high

in Wales, but yours is not. I will change my aftershave. Seriously, do

you think you need a change in leadership? I am working closely

with colleagues at Westminster, a robust group, offering all the

evidence. But Wales cannot go to the extremes, left or right, we need to

be governing from the centre. And if you looked at last week's Labour

conference, talking about changes to the executives, the Conservatives

want nobody to be left behind. The most important American in Britain.

The American ambassador has been in Wales, and we caught up with him in

Bangor, after he was talking to some students.

Well they want to talk about the election and

the Presidential election, of course, is something

that everyone I meet is following closely here.

We follow back home what's happening in Wales and the United Kingdom

But I reminded them, two great Welsh Americans fought it

out for President 200 years ago, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.

You go read what they said about each other, it'd

make the paint peel but they got through that!

The system is designed to be contentious, democracy

You were talking to some of the students, about something

happening - a sense of unease back at home and here.

Is that a reflection of some of the debates, your democracy,

I think it's happening on both sides of the Atlantic, the isle,

this growing gulf, people talking at each other or past each other.

Some may say the UK has been burning bridges

Before, we had been asked what we thought as friends.

We said it is up to you, we care, value a strong UK in a strong EU.

Whatever happens, this relationship will be -

as President Obama put it - unbreakable.

Ford are looking at how they invest in Wales.

Must be concerns for people looking to America and business?

Of course it creates uncertainties but what we are focused

on are all the things that don't change.

And the fact is, we are the number one investor.

One million British people wake up and go to work for American

One million American people wake up and go to work

Can that still continue, the working relationship?

Not only can it, it did yesterday, it is today, it will tomorrow,

government to government, business to business

Our First Minister has been in the US, this month.

He's got concerns but the message was Wales is open for business.

Do you think that's a message people are buying into in the US?

It demonstrated partnerships that exist, not getting complacent,

This takes daily nurturing, government level,

Here for the first time in north Wales.

Hoping you've enjoyed the countryside.

How do we persuade, as a nation, Wales, to get more people

Quite happy to go to London, Edinburgh...

Wonderful thing was done for President Obama,

who was the first sitting US President to visit Wales.

They did that great promotional video about Wales

with Matthew Reese, Damien Lewis, many others.

I wouldn't lead with getting them to try to pronounce some of the names!

Get them here first then show them the long sign, suck them in,

How is your council? Have you been happy with the service you have been

dating? The service seems to vary. And the leader of one of the largest

councils has told us it is time to cooperate. The government is going

to review the blueprint of how they should look in the future.

Wherever we live, we've all got something to say

But it seems some local authorities are better than others.

This report used 40 indicators, ranging from school attendance

records to use of leisure facilities, to map out council

Where we've got comparable indicators, in around two thirds

of those cases we've seen an improvement across Wales.

Equally important, I think, is the range of performance

and the difference between the best and worst performers.

And in over half of the indicators comparable, we've seen a narrowing

of the gap between the best and worst performers.

That said, there has also been a slight deterioration in some

areas, and there remain big differences between some councils,

including how they deal with your waste, for example.

This estuary has long been a political boundary.

These days it separates Carmarthenshire from Swansea.

Two neighbouring local authorities, and yet their record when it comes

to how much waste is sent to landfill couldn't

Swansea is the worst performing council with 38% of all rubbish

Carmarthenshire on the other hand is the best - just 5%.

Well, Swansea Council, whose recycling rate is higher

than the national target said it has chosen to predominantly use a local

landfill site for the next four years at a time when other councils

have opted to incinerate their non-recycable rubbish.

So-called bed blocking, delays in discharging people

from hospital due to lack of suitable arrangements elsewhere

is another area where people have had very different experiences,

Conwy is the best performer with fewer than one person per 1,000

over 75 having to wait longer in hospital than is necessary.

In Cardiff, the figure was 11/1000 - more than double the rate

I would suspect there is an issue about community resources that might

be affected by demographic and geographic issues -

if you have a rural area, you're relying on community GPs

whereas in the cities you could possibly have a higher

It is possible it is a geographic issue.

It is clear that every local authority has strengths and

weaknesses. What can be done to ensure people have equal resources.

The answer, cooperation. Not every council has enough capacity, we can

share offices, regional working, share practices. We need to look at

local government family. Make all areas rise. It seems the Local

On Tuesday, the local government statement,

members on his vision, having torn up his predecessor's map

for council mergers, Mark Drakeford is expected

to outline proposals for the existing local authorities

to work more closely together on a regional basis.

we have seen the variation in performance, is it inevitable that

we have got different councils, performing differently at different

aspects? Democratic organisations and although they have got

frameworks, they have got to provide some services, at different levels.

Choices to make. Some merit in saying you have to work together.

How difficult, how easy, to achieve that? The fore for misses, --

performances, for different measures. You have got to find out,

where is the best practice, improving at a range of different

areas. Recycling, school performance, and one of the main

differences, the percentage of care plans, gone from 58 to 84%. Using

this information effectively. That issue, sharing best practice, why

has Swansea not been asking neighbours, why has not been

happening? Local councils have been coming together, effectively

working. I think what we have got to put to one side, it is not going to

be a big announcement on Tuesday, that is not going to happen. But

what we are going to see is an encouragement of the good practices

and formalising some of those arrangements. Can we expect an

juicy, carrot and a stick? If you don't, cuts? We could see that, but

at the end of the day, a citizen of the country has the right to good

services. I think you could have that approach, but essentially we

have been talking about this. Local councils need to focus on these

services. It is about good services. Putting the citizens first, is going

to mean that local councils come together. It could be carrot and

stick. This is not the first time that it has been talked about. Local

government reorganised itself at Scotland, but still talking about it

here. We have been talking about it for a long time. But the government

thinks too many councils, fewer would be an answer, why has that not

been happening? I do not think they want to spend three years

reorganising. Some good practices, and some of the small practices

already teaming up with others, to provide services across the country.

A lot of good practice. I do not think they are keen to take on

reorganisation. But if they can work together, so easily, why not have

fewer? Why 22 chief executives? I think they are going to come

together, and possibly merge voluntarily. Shared officers. Not 22

trading standards officers. Services are going to be shared, not just

local government, but better collaboration for other agencies.

Better arrangements between them. When you said voluntary measures,

how many? -- mergers? I think we need to move away with the accession

from numbers, but when they want to come together, I think we are going

to seem less. No number? No. Do not forget, you can get the latest

political news And we're joined now by the former

Work and Pensions Secretary and Leave campaigner,

Iain Duncan Smith. it you said we could be out of the

European Union by 2018? My senses if you keep their process as simple as

possible and don't try to get special pleading and try to be a

member of the single market which they are not going to grant you, if

you go for a clear and simple position on trade and find an

agreement then the more complex issues then disappear. Theresa May

has said that when she brings the act forward to repeal the 1972 act,

at the same time you binding the European Law and you speed the

process up. Keeping it simple, keeping up pace is what we

recommended. It allows you to get the end point quicker.

You talk about member of the single market, Chris Grayling told me there

was no such thing, which slightly puzzled me. You clearly think that

there is. What you want, as I understand it, is a free-trade

agreement with the European Union. That could not be done by 2018? We

want free trade. There are two approaches to getting free trade

with the European Union. The first is that you say, OK, in this

process, if we sympathise and ask ourselves, if we now have a new

relationship, we have left, we want capital goods, we want to access

each other's markets, it benefits you more than us, but we are happy

not to have tariff barriers on your trade, we have an agreement of no

tariff barriers. Financial services are outside, a separate issue, more

of a regulatory issue. That is also approaching a deal on equivalence

that we could accelerate. The point I am saying is if you do not go down

the road trying to nominate individual bits and pieces and say

it is a good agreement for us both, you could reach that by agreement.

If you don't and you can't, you could fall back on the WTO

arrangements and say, well, later on, we will continue that

negotiation discussion to decide whether or not we want a free-trade

position. If you fall back on that, what you say to the boss of Nissan,

who says he will not invest again in this unless the government back row

compensates him, he faces tariffs? The answer to that is that first of

all I did not believe we will end up in a situation where it is, in any

way, a financial benefit for the European Union to want to impose any

kind tariff. Right now you are 12% better off anyway. The level of the

pound has made it 12% more competitive with European partners,

even if you slapped on 10% tariff. It goes up and down, but you asking

him to take investment decisions, multi-billion pound decisions, head

of Jaguar, saying roughly the same thing, at a time of real

uncertainty. Until it is resolved, investment in Britain will slow

down, if not dry up? They invest because this is a darn good place to

sell your businesses. You heard from the head of the publishing sector in

Germany, he said Britain in five years' time will be much more

profitable than anywhere else and will be the boom place. Outside the

European Union it will be more flexible to set out arrangements. I

am with him on this. I was in business before I came into

politics. Nobody knows what the future holds for anything. For car

makers and others that want to build stuff, they are here because they

want a flexible workforce, much lower levels of cost, and a much

better contract law base. 85% of Nissan's output goes to the single

market. That is right, they also sell here. 15%? You are not suddenly

going to meet a massive tariff wall, a closet is not in the interests of

the European Union to set up a massive tariffs. Guess who sells

more to us than we do to them? The European Union. The Germans

themselves are behind-the-scenes talking to us. We had a lot of that

during the referendum. Let me move onto some other things. Damian Green

is now running your old department. He is scrapping repeated tests for

the seriously disabled, people that you know are not going to be able to

improve. Why didn't you do that? We wanted to change this, it was a

programme given to us by the last Labour government, we did quite a

lot to improve it. The big problem, the programme as it exists at the

moment, it does not deal with health conditions, it deals with ability to

work. That is the problem. If you want to scrap it for people with

health conditions, you have to change the criteria by which they

are being assessed. That has always been the issue. For disability

payments, it is a different matter. They are assessed on their

condition. The problem for that... He will stop the assessments of

people that are seriously disabled, why didn't you do that? This is not

seriously disabled, it is people that suffer from sickness

conditions, not necessarily full-time disability. There are two

elements. When I was in Government, we have always set out a process

that said we needed to change the way the sickness benefit system was

assessed. That was so you could rule out conditions, some progressive,

some absolute, on a medical basis, on the approval of the Health

Service, so they would say this is a condition that will change, it will

mean they cannot work now but they might be able to work for a bit. You

put it into a box marked medical conditions. That was already on the

box. He has just done that, to acclaim. Why didn't you do it, if it

is that simple? We needed to get agreement in Government and we have

not reached the Provo ease approval. It is a wider plan. This could have

been incremented on its own? But you have to change the way you do it. I

was in favour of a bigger plan that brought in changes all into one,

because they are competing with each other and do not have the kind of

effect that you want. It is the right thing to do. Until now, there

have not been a huge number of assessments taking place because the

system has not been able to cover it. There is a lot of talk about

trying to reposition the Tory party on the centre ground, even the

centre-left, talking about worker's rights and so on. It is not credible

until she does something. 6 million people earn less than the Living

Wage, after six years of Conservative government. 6 million

people earn less than the Living Wage. That is the reality, not Tory

erect a wreck that we are hearing in the hall. -- that is the Tory

rhetoric. Raising the minimum wage was making sure that you identify

that and raise the blood. There are still 6 million below. The mantra of

this government was to make work pay. 50% of families in poverty have

at least one family member working. They are still in poverty, waiting,

doing difficult and unpleasant jobs, long hours, they are still in

poverty. Many people in this country work and still it is the equivalent

of poverty. That does not pay, work does not pay for them. Huge problems

down the low skill level of work. This is the one area, the level of

skills at that point is arguably some of the lowest in the Western

world. Companies too often do not invest in skills because of the

nature of the tax credit system, you have them in packets of 16 hours, it

is not worth investing. Universal Credit will change all of that quite

dramatically. It allows people to work more of the hours, invest more

in them. The second aspect is back to the migration issue. That has had

a very damaging effect on low workers. There are two elements of

this. It is not just the statutory migration, it is that what happened

is that a lot of people come for under one year. They do part-time

work, they claim full benefits, Migration Watch proved it is over 4

billion per year. That allows them to go and do cash in hand work. It

is a big problem, it has only now become clear how damaging that has

become to British people working at low income level. What does this

party, if it is this self-styled Workers Party, what does it have to

do in a country where 6 million people get less than the Living

Wage, 50% of people in poverty are already in work and poverty levels

among those in work are at record levels. So much for the worker's

party? The answer is it has to do a lot, we have been talking about

Brexit a lot, Theresa May has dropped a lot of hints about what

she wants to do. The announcement yesterday morning about this massive

review, led by a Blairite, Matthew Taylor, to completely re-examine

employment rights. Thereby meaning, for the low paid and the casual

workers, holiday pay for Uber drivers, it opens a massive area of

things, grammar schools... You need high-quality technology schools to

up-skill its? She has all of this on her agenda, possibly more

interesting than even Brexit. I was planning not to mention Brexit in

this segment, but I think I did. There was a lot of flesh to be put

on his bones before it is convincing? Theresa May is playing a

political game of trying to dump the nasty party image, become a more

compassionate conservative. She is changing from the David Cameron era,

instead of being the bottom 10% or 15% of people that he was focusing

on, as well as the wealthier elite, she is looking at the people earning

more than ?16,000, up to ?21,000, those who have children that are not

on free school meals, not the most deprived, she calls them the just

managing classes, they might have one for holiday each year, they

might want to send their kids to piano lessons or the local Football

Club, they are not the poorest people on welfare. That could have

an impact on what you're saying, it could also undermine her reputation

for being compassionate if she is seen to be abandoning the people

that need help most. There is always a political case for doing something

for Middle Britain, where most people are. They call at Middle

America over there and so on. But these are not the in work but in

poverty. Being a worker's party, one that dines out on its support for

work, if it is to do anything, it has to do something about these

people? The key issue is what the economic policies are in this new

government. Nobody on the programme this morning has talked about the

deficit, which George Osborne framed everything around, to the point

where, as they know better than anyone, he struggles to get welfare

reforms affected because of our budget cuts that hit those on low

income in work. Until we know the degree to which the framing of that

deficit strategy has changed, we will not really know the space they

will have to make sure that does not happen over the next few years and

the opposite happens. That applies to all of these issues, actually.

The economy will provide the space, or not, to do these things. The

Treasury is telling the Chancellor that the slowdown in the economy,

not as slow as they thought, but still a slowdown, that, in itself,

will widen the deficit. Therefore, he is not going to have a tonne of

money to throw around on top of that, which would widen the deficit

even further. There is room for manoeuvre which may be quite slight?

Not quite true. He has abandoned George Osborne's fiscal targets.

Having already taken this into account by what they think is the

slowing of the economy. They have been wrong in the past, but that is

why they have done that. There is not a turn of money around to spend

billions on infrastructure, unless, of course, like Mr Corbyn, you want

to borrow it. When you say you are not going to eradicate the deficit

by 2020, that is what you mean. If he needs to cushion the Brexit

impact, if there is one, I don't think we could pay off the deficit

by 2020. Then you'll have all of this money to do what you want with.

Final thought? There is also the attitude about business and the

attitude to the super rich and well. I think Theresa May will concentrate

on that more than David Cameron, alleviating concerns. The Autumn

Statement from the Chancellor will be as big as any of the statements

we hear this week. I am glad to hear it, it will be coming up live on a

Daily Politics special. at the Conservative Party

conference here in Birmingham. Fear not, I'll be back tomorrow

at 11am for a two-hour special as Chancellor Philip Hammond

takes to the stage. We are back on Tuesday and Wednesday

bringing Theresa May's speech on Wednesday just before lunch. We will

be back next Sunday as well. In the meantime, remember -

if it's Sunday, it's Euro 2016,

what a time for Welsh football. to develop the next stars of

the future? We've definitely got the numbers,

our numbers are right up there. But given our Welsh weather,

should our grassroots be 3G? If there were better pitches at

a younger age, you'd probably get more kids

coming through. You're probably looking at

about 850K just to put a pitch down.